•1# 




Vs 



>(on 




)>) 



Reprinted from The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social 

Science, Philadelphia, July, 1917. 

Publication No. 1128. 



THE SIGNIFICANCE OF OUR MISSION IN THIS WAR 

By Miles M. Dawson, LL.D., 

New York. 

The part which the United States should play in the war, and 
in making the treaty of peace, should be determined by the things 
upon which this government rests, for which it stands and the prac- 
ticability of which it has demonstrated. 

These fundamental things, as is recognized throughout the 
world, with dread by beneficiaries of autocracy, with tears and 
thanksgiving by friends of freedom, are few, but most important 
to mankind. Our triumphant justification of them brought to- 
gether, out of all the nations of Europe, this great people, enabled 
France to find her way to a stable republic, made all American states 
republican, liberalized all governments the world over and, as a lode- 
star, drew the half-wakened peoples of China and of Russia along 
the road to freedom under institutions modelled on our own. 

These fundamentals may be epitomized into five : 

i. The inalienable right of every man to life, liberty and the 
pursuit of happiness — not as a mere dead saying, but as a living 
reality. 

2. The right of local self-government, within territories 
possessing or entitled to claim such right, embracing every power 
of government not expressly granted to the union. 

3. The guaranty to each state of a forum for the redress of 
grievances of one state against another with full power to enforce 
the verdict of that forum. 

4. The guaranty of a republican form of government to each 
constituent state. 

5. The right and duty to maintain the union. 

The United States, though by tradition and on principle neutral 
as regards quarrels between European nations, is forced into this 
war to defend the lives of its own citizens, engaged in peaceful 
pursuits and protected by international law and solemn treaties. 
The crucial issue which has driven our republic into the arena is to 
champion what the fathers of the republic rightly termed the in- 
alienable rights of man. It would be quite impossible for this 

l 



\1 



^k 



2 The Annals of the American Academy 

nation to retrace the step which it has taken, were the central 
powers merely to offer to respect the rights of our citizens and to 
make amends; the issue now is that, as regards all neutrals peaceably 
attending to their own business, these inalienable rights must be 
respected. The other things for which this nation stands are not 
involved so openly; they are not directly at issue. But are they 
not likely, even almost certain, to be determined at the same time 
and by the same arbitrament and thus the principles which our 
nation has established by demonstrating their practicability, to be 
incorporated into the treaty of peace? 

For instance, what else does the proposition signify that small 
and weak nations shall be protected and be preserved, but that 
states and their peoples shall enjoy the right of self-government? 
And that this is to be protected implies, in turn, that the union of 
states which is to protect it, shall, acting together, be granted 
authority to adjust interstate issues and to enforce the verdict. 
Is not recognition of this essential, if situations like that which arose 
regarding Serbia are to be dealt with otherwise than by war? Or if 
violation of neutrality and destruction of small nations, such as in 
the case of Belgium, are to be avoided? 

It is a long step toward the realization of the fourth principle, 
that each such state should be guaranteed a republican form of 
government; but it seems not unlikely that it will be taken. 
Casting off their shackles, the peoples of China and of Russia have 
shown not only that Germans, Austrians and Turks might do like- 
wise, but also that, in order to avoid the loss of honor and a remnant 
of power, monarchs may be inclined to yield the real reins of govern- 
ment to representative assemblies. This may, and probably will, 
be as far as this principle will be realized at present in some of the 
countries; but even so, it could not be expected that the peace of 
nations would be preserved if each were to be exposed to the peril of 
overthrow of its constitution by a tyrant. No union of nations, 
whether formally so organized or not, could maintain itself, without 
defending each nation in the enjoyment of republican institutions. 
The guaranty must, in the nature of things, be given; whether openly 
or impliedly, while important, is not all-important. 

The United States has found it unavoidable to accept the 
burden of this guaranty even as regards states with which it has no 
express or binding union. Thus it has had to protect Mexico 






1 



Our Mission in the War 3 

against the overturn of its republican government by Huerta, and 
Cuba against a like overturn by Gomez, not to speak of intervention 
in San Domingo and Costa Rica. It will also be impossible to avoid 
such guaranty, when, through some sort of joint agency, the nations 
undertake to protect the sovereignty of individual states, viz., a 
guaranty that the peoples are really represented— even though in 
some cases misrepresented— in the government of the states that 
compose the union of nations. 

The fifth fundamental principle, that such union of nations 
must be maintained and that no nation will be permitted to with- 
draw, may seem yet further from realization. Indeed it is not 
probable that it will be included in any treaty. But one must 
remember it was not in the federal constitution; yet it was enforced 
when secession was attempted. Secession from the union of states, 
composing this nation, is thinkable, however; but is it even thinkable 
that, once a world union is established, any nation would be per- 
mitted to retire? 

Consider that, if the other nations remained united and were 
much the stronger, it would mean that the withdrawing nation 
would be subject to their discipline but without a voice in their 
councils. This, only to enable it to shirk the common burden ! If it 
sought to withdraw, rather than submit to control for the common 
good, that could not be suffered; if it withdrew as an act of defiance, 
its challenge would have to be accepted or the union would fall apart. 
The logic of events would thus compel the maintenance of the union. 

Even by men who give much attention to international subjects 
and the study of government, it is not always so clearly seen as it 
should be that this nation has demonstrated that all these five things 
of so great importance to mankind are actually realizable. Yet this 
is the crowning achievement of the United States ! Fewer, no doubt, 
have appreciated that already several of these things have proved 
necessary as an extra-territorial exercise of this nation's powers. 
Yet this is evidence of the great service of the United States in 
showing the way and of the great need for the extension of these 
principles to all nations. 

Out of this example set by our nation and out of its righteous 
participation in this war with these purposes in view, there should 
come the application of these principles to the solution of the world's 
problems as the practical way to guarantee liberty to all nations, all 
peoples, all men. 



020 914 039 1 



J/lOll 



IX 




\*\ 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



020 914 039 1 



Hollinger Corp. 
P H8.5 



